from the look-at-the-opportunities dept

There have been a large number of "downer" stories recently on the newspaper business -- which has certainly been struggling. But there are a few stories coming out that highlights how, like any challenge, for some this really represents a big opportunities. First, there's a post by Steve Outing, where he talks about an (as yet unnamed) group of recently laid off journalists from a major newspaper who are actually using their severance packages to start an online competitor. Who knows if it will succeed (and, I'd worry that just bringing in old newspaper guys alone won't be enough), but it is interesting that they're basically using the severance packages to bootstrap the new organization.

Next up, courtesy of Mathew Ingram is a discussion on why the current crisis in newspapers should lead to better journalism. This goes against the hand-wringing of many in the industry right now who seem to think that as newspapers go under -- so does journalism. That, of course, makes the huge mistake in assuming that journalism only comes from newspapers. The discussion includes a long list of things that will get better once the old structures go away, and new opportunities are embraced. You should read the whole thing, but it includes a recognition that the online world will likely create more respect for the audience, more reporters & more reporting, better reporting since the audience is more involved in the process and more ways to tell a story. That all sounds good.

And finally, for those of you still clinging to the idea that physical newspapers are the preferred medium, Ken Paulson recently gave a speech, where he outlined an alternate reality where the newspaper was invented after the internet. The point was to highlight the "advantages" that a newspaper provides to the internet. I'm not so sure that the advantages are really all that compelling in most cases, but it does show that perhaps the newspapers bemoaning the supposed death of print should be a bit more focused on providing more value, rather than complaining about the internet.

from the happy-new-year dept

A few weeks ago, we got an email sent to the feedback box that asked how we can possibly stay upbeat. I have to apologize because I can't find the email anymore -- so I don't remember who sent it -- but he pointed out that while he really enjoyed reading Techdirt and liked what we had to say, the stories about corporate cluelessness, political corruption and short-sighted thinking were so consistently frustrating and depressing that there were times he considered giving up on reading Techdirt -- if just to keep himself from banging his head against the wall. He wanted to know how we possibly stayed upbeat, and kept positive enough to avoid giving ourselves heart attacks. I didn't get a chance to email him back, but wanted to address the question here as my final post of 2008.

Techdirt has been going strong since 1997, so it's not like we're new to covering these sorts of things. But, in the end, I personally stay extremely happy and optimistic because I see how far we've come -- and I recognize the inevitable outcome of most of these debates. Yes, we point out plenty of bad stuff, but it's not about complaining about how terrible things are -- but about trying to help open some eyes to the possibilities of moving forward, adapting and embracing new technological possibilities. And, while there are some extremely loud and public holdouts, every day we're seeing examples of it working. We see the inevitable results of technological change in enabling new and powerful business models that greatly expand markets, provide consumers with much more than before, and enable new innovations that you might never have thought were possible before.

The internet is a phenomenal communications tool that very few people had even heard of not so long ago. The world wide web only came into being slightly more than fifteen years ago. The ability to go online and find just about anything you need in seconds is a brand new phenomenon. The fact that you can talk to people, easily, in far away places -- make new connections, share stories, exchange ideas, debate, argue and connect, well beyond your local community -- is all simply amazing. Beyond online communications, the internet has provided new and amazing tools for business, commerce, entertainment and information that were nearly impossible to imagine by all but the most visionary people just a few decades ago.

How can you not be optimistic and excited when you look back at how far we've come in such a short time, and think about how much further we can go?

Yes, we're in the midst of a brutal financial mess -- but that won't stop innovation. Yes, incumbent forces, with short-sighted plans and a desire to hold back the tides are annoying and disruptive (not in a good way) in the short run. But even they are finding they can't hold back progress. Robert Friedel has a wonderful book called A Culture of Improvement that details how we, as a society, are constantly looking to improve on what we already have. We add ideas and ingenuity to old concepts and build something better -- not because of the desire to grab some "intellectual property," but because of the desire to improve our own lot, to build a better tool that we want to use. Incumbent short-sighted players have been able to hinder and harm progress, but they can't keep it down completely. That culture of improvement can't be stopped entirely.

There is, of course, plenty to be vigilant about, of course. Bad and corrupt political moves can seriously stunt economic improvement, but history has shown that such periods are often short-lived, as the need for continued economic growth and advancement is impossible to stomp out completely -- and as it seeps out through the cracks, legacy businesses crumble, and outdated political rules and short-sighted policies are pushed to the side. Yes, more come along, often as the innovators of yesterday seek to stop the innovators of tomorrow, but the march of innovation hasn't been stopped yet.

So, yes, we rant and rage against short-sighted policies, and efforts that hinder and delay the inevitable, but we're excited and optimistic and happy about what we see as the eventual possibilities from that advancement and innovation. Any "anger" or "unhappiness" we might display is more frustration at ourselves for not being able to clearly paint a picture -- for those seeking to hold back progress -- of just what opportunities moving forward provides.

As we move into 2009, there are plenty of things to be worried about, but look around at what progress has brought to us already, and look at the trends and the obvious direction in which technology is taking us -- there's so much to look forward to, it's hard to let any depression seep into the discussion at all.

Happy New Year to all of the many readers of Techdirt, whether you agree with us or disagree with us, and we look forward to seeing what great new things come about in the new year and beyond.

from the depends-on-who-you-read dept

I just saw a bunch of headlines fly by and the contrast in them seemed worth noting. Here are just a few, with a brief intro based on whether it's a glass half-full headline or a glass half-empty headline:

The most accurate may be from the AFP, who notes: Internet advertising revenue up but slowing, and the LA Times: Internet advertising grows slightly, but analysts worry about the future. Basically, the numbers are still up but at a slower pace than in the past. How you interpret that, apparently, depends on whether you're fundamentally an optimist or a pessimist. It seems pretty clear that there's still plenty of money heading into the online advertising world -- and it was going to plateau at some point. You can't keep up ridiculous growth levels at all times, especially when the broader economy runs into trouble. Plus, the fact that a healthy percentage of online advertising was tied to the mortgage/loan/financial services industry -- you'd have to expect some slowing of growth. No matter what you believe the future holds for the online ad market, you have to admit the juxtaposition of headlines is rather amusing.

Perhaps much more interesting, however, is this analysis of what happened to the advertising market during the Great Depression. It found that while some companies shied away from advertising, the ones that did well focused in on more effective advertising, which worked wonders. So the advertising market itself didn't collapse, it just got more focused, and those who used it wisely ended up doing quite well.

from the the-market-is-changing dept

Adam Thierer has tried to categorize a bunch of different book authors and internet "thinkers" into one of two camps: internet optimists and internet pessimists. I'm somewhat surprised to be included among the optimists for a few reasons -- not the least of which is that I'm surprised to see my name included with a lot of folks who are a lot more prestigious. I don't belong in such a group.

That said, I'm a bit torn about the overall chart. I am optimistic about what new technologies and innovation allow, but I hardly think of myself as an idealist -- and tend to agree with Adam that things like wikis don't solve everything, and that we haven't reached a post-capitalist world where traditional means of production are passe. However, perhaps I'm misreading some of the other "optimists" on the list, but I don't think anyone really believes that either. As I've pointed out in the past, none of what we talk about here is about any fundamental change or shift in economics. It's the same old economics that has applied for ages. It's just trying to explain how changes in technology impact those economics.

So, I agree that it's silly to think that peer production completely replaces professional production means, but that's another extreme scenario that I don't think very many are actually pitching. Instead, the point that they're making is that peer production models will also enter the market, meaning that traditional business models will face some competition. It doesn't mean that one wins out entirely over the other, just that it may force some models of production to adjust to the reality of the market. I don't necessarily think that's an optimistic viewpoint -- it's just a realistic explanation of what's happening. While some pessimists may not like it, they're basically just whining for a different world that doesn't exist any more, and don't like the fact that they can't continue to live in that world.

I also disagree that the "optimists" don't believe in property rights, as Thierer implies. I'm a huge believer in property rights. My point is simply that "property" needs to be applied properly -- meaning not to infinite goods, where it doesn't make much sense. So while I can see where Adam is going with this chart, I'm not sure the characterizations really fit.